Trollhattan Saab has changed!
The site you're viewing now is the original Trollhattan Saab weblog, though it's now an archive only and no new material is posted here. As of February 2009, all new material is posted at our new site - Saabs United.
Please join us at Saabs United and get your daily Saab fix from Saab sources all around the world.
In part one of this story, EduSaab uncovered a recent Saab design patent for the the 9-6x design done a few years ago and registered under the name of one of GM Europe’s lead designers and a Saab guru, Anthony Lo.
In part two, I did a poll here asking you which vehicle you’d prefer: the 9-6x or what became the gap filler – the 9-7x. Over 60% of respondents thought the 9-6x would have been a better vehicle for Saab, despite the baggage of the Subaru connection that killed the 9-2x.
Actually, what was more interesting for me as a blogger was the low response rate. With only 156 votes, it seemed like people were somewhat careless about a Saab SUV all together.
——
On to part three.
I wish I could tell you more about it, but the firewall on my PC won’t let me look into it further. That will have to wait until later.
What I can tell you is that some forum members over at VW Vortex’s Saab spinoff, TurboNines, claim that there’s some life left in the 9-6x story. I got this in via email from one of the TurboNines moderators:
I had time to do a little investigation last night via Google on what the rumors were back in 2005. Putting the pieces together, there’s a compelling case for the 9-6x being back in the cards. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on it.
Jalopnik have picked up on the story, too, and provide linkage to the T9 site that I can’t see.
Without having seen the material, I’ve got to say I’m skeptical about it. I’ll stick to the theory that they were just covering off their intellectual property.
The thought that there would be a three-year-old design on the way when the current designs (9-5 and 9-4x) are yet to make it into production just seems a little too far-fetched to me.
I’ll check out that material later and follow up, but in the meantime, check it out for yourself and let me know what you think.
–
12 responses so far ↓
1 Alex
// Nov 19, 2008 at 11:21 am
The only way it makes sense is if GM has killed the 9-4X behind the scenes and they’re throwing the 9-6X back together as a short-notice replacement (which I’d honestly be fine with, my money thinks that the Subaru’s probably a sportier drive anyways). All it needs is new taillight moldings, new front end sheetmetal and hopefully, a new interior. It’s really just as much of a Saab as the 9-4X would be, it has the ability to take a turbo-4, it has diesels, and it has a much better NA engine in the silky-smooth flat 6.
If anything it’s more Saab-like than a rebadged mexican cadillac because it at least has a quirky powertrain arrangement that can trace it’s roots back to a longitudinal-engine FWD car.
Either that, or the 9-4X has been delayed enough (years, maybe?) to make the 9-6x a viable stopgap model.
2 Markac
// Nov 19, 2008 at 11:32 am
I still think the 9-6x would’ve been marginally better for Saab than the 9-7x but now that the 9-7x is coming to the end of it’s lifespan, I can’t help agreeing with Jalopnik’s statement “Saab needs a replacement SUV like a Prius needs drag slicks.”
By the time the 9-4x gets released the GM SUV cashcow will have largely dried up and I’ve always felt that the money wasted on another SUV, could be better spent getting the next 9-3 out sooner or on a 9-1. Both of those cars are far more important to Saab.
3 SaabKen
// Nov 19, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Alex, IMHO I don’t believe the delayed 9-4X implies it’s cancelled. For pete’s sakes, even the BioPower concept was a drivable one:
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/223029/saab_94_x.html
And we’ve seen it virtually un-disguised this year in testing. As the sister vehicle Caddy SRX Mk.II is slated for launch, it would be idiotic for GM to cancel 9-4X at this late stage in the game and not exploit the economies of scale in terms of R&D and all manufacturing costs across both models than just the SRX.
Frankly I think this 9-6X speculation has gone off on a tangent. Just because Anthony Lo re-patented the name, and prolly re-hashed the original Saabaru 9-6X to become a 4-dr version, doesn’t mean it’s anywhere near production. We have heard absolutely nothing about a second, larger sibling to the 9-4X anytime in the past and I very much doubt it’s in their immediate plans to do so, esp. with the current dire situations at hand. I believe Lo simply re-applied for that patent as a placeholder for a future, longer-term possibility. I mean LONG TERM.
my $0.25
4 Jeff
// Nov 19, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Alex – “Just as much of a Saab as the 9-4x would be?” Really? The 9-4x was new from the platform up. The 9-6x would be another Saabaru. I like Subaru, but we don’t need to repeat that fiasco. The idea that it would be a unique interior is a total pipe dream. At least the 9-4x was designed by Saab to be a Saab.
I’m with Swade on this one, they probably just wanted to keep control of the name in case they need it later.
5 Mag-X
// Nov 19, 2008 at 5:17 pm
They probably just want to keep tabs on the IP.Patent trolls will do anything for quick cash.
However, I don’t think the 9-6X would be that bad of an idea. With the short memories of American consumers, gas prices falling, and the 9-7X coming to an end, there’ll be a slot open at the top end of the model line up. They’d have to redesign the sheet metal again though as it would appear Subaru took what they did and used it for their own model redesign.
6 The Fop
// Nov 19, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Storm in a tea cup. If they wanted a “stop gap” model and started work now, there is still no way it would ever be ready before even a delayed 9-4X. Sorry if that dissapoints anyone – though personally having seen a Tribeca for the first time a couple of weeks ago I can’t see what good this mish-mash could possibly do.
7 Martin N
// Nov 19, 2008 at 10:08 pm
“they probably just wanted to keep control of the name in case they need it later.”
The name? I thought this was about the design.
The name is of hopefully protected since way back, together with all other possible extrapolations of current and historical Saab model names. From 91 to 99, from 9-1 to 9-9, from 9-1x to 9-9x.
8 saabyurk
// Nov 19, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Seems like Motor Authority have discovered that the registered U.S. patent publicly available at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office web site, has “leaked onto the Internet”. They say “If the images turn out to be authentic…”. I wish I was more clueless so I could get a good-paying job writing nonsense like that. Oh well, I needed a good laugh to get my day started.
9 Adam
// Nov 20, 2008 at 12:12 am
Taking an extra year to get the interior right on an Impreza/WRX-based 9-2X and Tribeca-based 9-6X would have been the way to go and would be on the market gaining market share for years now. But that ship has sailed as they say.
10 Tompa
// Nov 20, 2008 at 12:34 am
The 9-4X IS a Saab.. and the Caddy sybling is a Eurofied american 4×4.
11 gordon
// Nov 20, 2008 at 12:47 am
Here in SUV and Subaru land, Colorado, you just don’t see Tribeca’s on the road. Outbacks, Foresters, Tahoes, Explorers, Cherokees, almost never a Tribeca. Does it look too much like a minivan?
By the way, the issuance of a design patent does not mean much about today. They don’t cost much to file and if they are allowed by the Patent Office, almost every company will let them issue. That costs even less. It means a lot about what GM was thinking on the filing date. (Let’s discourage people from making aftermarket replacement body parts for our new car.) As for today, it probably means that GM would rather have an asset on the books to offset the cost of filing and prosecuting the patent. Investors and market watchers like companies that have patents even when the patents are for products that don’t exist. I’m a patent attorney for Fortune 500 companies, but not GM. This is just my guess.
12 SaabKen
// Nov 20, 2008 at 12:48 am
Saabyurk – yeah I laughed reading that too. They must also moonlight as weather forecasters: “There is a 40% chance of precipitation tomorrow, but otherwise sunny with blue skies ….”, LOL